Bernd Warken <bwarken@mayn.de> writes:
> 2) The copyleft sign is not a logo, but a functional character analoguously
> to the copyright sign. This has been discussed in length and proved amply.
> We shouldn't iterate eaten stuff like the cows do.

As has been noted, there is no juridical concept "copyleft" in the same
way as there is something well-defined called "copyright". In fact,
unless I have missed something, "copyleft" is completely void from
a juridical standpoint.

While an attempt to dress up like something else, the sign is for all
practical purposes a logotype.